It barely edges out a dual-core in heavily threaded tasks, and is only on par for Llano when it comes to heavily threaded tasks. It sounds as though the FX chips will be exactly what I said in every other thread--Phenom II's IPC but higher clocked and support for more threads. That won't make it better than Intel offerings, but it will be quite close in terms of value--at least until Haswell launches.

Click to expand...

Core i3-3220 != dual core CPU
Pentium G2120 = dual core CPU

You see, just how AMD's Bulldozer modules are "less" than what we're used to CPU cores being until now, so are Intel's Hyper-Threading enabled CPUs "more" than what physical CPU cores stand for. In a sense, they're both pseudo quad core CPUs.

Either way, they're competitive with Intel's IB i3s, seeing as how they manage to score CPU "wins" enough times here and there, are a tad cheaper than them (especially than the i3-xxx5 ones, that come with HD4000), can be overclocked as opposed to Intel and especially, dominate everything integrated GPU-wise.

Some of you are missing the point. The target audience for these APUs are HTPC users and users who do light gaming. I really don't see anyone looking to buy these to convert videos or do heavy video editing or anything like that. If you are, then you are looking at the wrong product.

Some of you are missing the point. The target audience for these APUs are HTPC users and users who do light gaming. I really don't see anyone looking to buy these to convert videos or do heavy video editing or anything like that. If you are, then you are looking at the wrong product.

Click to expand...

The problem for all of your statement is we are looking for our PC to do it all, gaming, media, transcode, surfing, editing.

We have been promised this digital dream world where it all just happens with ease and we have control of it, instead we find ourselves with powerful devices in their own rights, but step out of their niche and all of a sudden your $500 smart phone is useless. Your $900 PC can't do that. Consoles are to far behind the curve to do too much more, your tablet can do this, but can't finish the project you want, so then you need your laptop, and oh, you have a spouse AND kids? Make that times three or four.

So now we have 5 devices each all with multiple core CPU's, decent to powerful GPU's, TB of storage, fast internet access, yet they all fall short of one or two devices that work together seamlessly and have a common interface. As much as it pains me to say it, Apple is looking like they are going to get the interface done sooner than MS, or Android can. Windows 8 is still a failure at the connected dream. When my smart TV logs onto my PC from any room in my home, or through my phone, and allows me to integrate my videos and or pictures easier and edit them I will be impressed. With almost 9TB total of storage in my home, 24Ghz worth of CPU processing power, 15MBps of internet download speed I should be able to shoot a 1080 video with my phone, download it, have it compressed and uploaded so my parent's can watch their grandchildren without it taking 20 steps. But it does.

The problem for all of your statement is we are looking for our PC to do it all, gaming, media, transcode, surfing, editing.

We have been promised this digital dream world where it all just happens with ease and we have control of it, instead we find ourselves with powerful devices in their own rights, but step out of their niche and all of a sudden your $500 smart phone is useless. Your $900 PC can't do that. Consoles are to far behind the curve to do too much more, your tablet can do this, but can't finish the project you want, so then you need your laptop, and oh, you have a spouse AND kids? Make that times three or four.

So now we have 5 devices each all with multiple core CPU's, decent to powerful GPU's, TB of storage, fast internet access, yet they all fall short of one or two devices that work together seamlessly and have a common interface. As much as it pains me to say it, Apple is looking like they are going to get the interface done sooner than MS, or Android can. Windows 8 is still a failure at the connected dream. When my smart TV logs onto my PC from any room in my home, or through my phone, and allows me to integrate my videos and or pictures easier and edit them I will be impressed. With almost 9TB total of storage in my home, 24Ghz worth of CPU processing power, 15MBps of internet download speed I should be able to shoot a 1080 video with my phone, download it, have it compressed and uploaded so my parent's can watch their grandchildren without it taking 20 steps. But it does.

Click to expand...

A $500 5800k system gets you a budget niche htpc/light gaming rig. How much money have you invested in your 24ghz, 9tb of storage, and everything else with it? Way more than $500. I have friends, co workers, etc that want me to build them super powerful gaming pc's. Then I tell them what they want is $1000+ and they shy away. Since they all don't play more than league of legends and starcraft 2, I tell them that they can get away with around $500. They are much more willing to get that.

You see, just how AMD's Bulldozer modules are "less" than what we're used to CPU cores being until now, so are Intel's Hyper-Threading enabled CPUs "more" than what physical CPU cores stand for. In a sense, they're both pseudo quad core CPUs.

Either way, they're competitive with Intel's IB i3s, seeing as how they manage to score CPU "wins" enough times here and there, are a tad cheaper than them (especially than the i3-xxx5 ones, that come with HD4000), can be overclocked as opposed to Intel and especially, dominate everything integrated GPU-wise.

Click to expand...

Hyper-Threading is very different from the Bulldozer Module design. Hyper-Threading just allows threads to be parked so they are run slightly faster, there are only 2 cores, they are just optimized nicely to run 4 threads better than 2 cores traditionally could. Modules are sets of cores that have their own hardware, but share components (schedulers mostly iirc). If you're going to say an i3 is a quad-core because it can run 4 threads then an i7 is an octo-core.

They are competitive when you compare the iGPU portion, and prioritize it. CPU intensive tasks still give a pretty sizable edge to Intel, but that was to be expected.

Not enough power to warrant a big board and not enough overclock benefit to justify a K with the higher TDP. Of course most don't pay enough attention to the reviews to note those points so I'm sure it'll sell well enough out of the gate.

There would be no huge ram bottlenecks with 256sp even when oc'ed. ddr3-2400 is cheap and 8gb is plenty. Mobo is good-enough looking and should overclock fine. Gfx card is a worthy companion for 1080p gaming.

I did just copy and past the parts from above pretty much. I think the you could spend a lot less on the motherboards for these systems too. I would also drop to a lower speed ram in the intel system because it does not gain as much from it.

I personally would take the intel build. If I didn't have the money, I would take the amd. If space or heat was a concern, I would take the amd.

I did just copy and past the parts from above pretty much. I think the you could spend a lot less on the motherboards for these systems too. I would also drop to a lower speed ram in the intel system because it does not gain as much from it.

I personally would take the intel build. If I didn't have the money, I would take the amd. If space or heat was a concern, I would take the amd.

Click to expand...

All is fine and dandy, but LAMO, why is the AMD RAM, that seems to be identical to the Intel one, $30 more?

Anyway... if you can get them in your country (I can't ), I recommend the Samsung Green RAM thingy... their uber low price, low profile and uber overclockable/low voltage makes them perfect for an APU setup, and they have a freaking black PCB to top it off.